Approaching a critical turn? A content analysis of the politics of resilience in key bodies of resilience literature

Biermann, Maureen; Hillmer-Pegram, Kevin; Knapp, Corrine Nöel; Hum, Richard

doi:10.1080/21693293.2015.1094170

Cited by 42 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 65 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A substantive literature presents critiques of the use of systems approaches in the social sciences in general (Giddens, 1979;Lilienfeld, 1978), and more specifically in geography (Gregory, 1980;Kennedy, 1979;Kull & Rangan, 2016;Watts, 2011), in ecology (for example, Taylor, 2005;Taylor, 2011), and in resilience thinking (for example, Biermann et al, 2015;Brown, 2014;Kirchhoff et al, 2010;Porter & Davoudi, 2012). A substantive literature presents critiques of the use of systems approaches in the social sciences in general (Giddens, 1979;Lilienfeld, 1978), and more specifically in geography (Gregory, 1980;Kennedy, 1979;Kull & Rangan, 2016;Watts, 2011), in ecology (for example, Taylor, 2005;Taylor, 2011), and in resilience thinking (for example, Biermann et al, 2015;Brown, 2014;Kirchhoff et al, 2010;Porter & Davoudi, 2012).…”

Section: Epistemology: Systems and Metaphorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using the “regime shift” concept in addressing social–ecological change

Kull

Kueffer

Richardson

et al. 2017

Geographical Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

‘Regime shift’ has emerged as a key concept in the environmental sciences. The concept has roots in complexity science and its ecological applications, and is increasingly applied to intertwined social and ecological phenomena. Yet what exactly is a regime shift? We explore this question at three nested levels. First, we propose a broad, contingent, multi‐perspective epistemological basis for the concept, seeking to build bridges between its complexity theory origins and critiques from science studies, political ecology, and environmental history. Second, we define the concept in a way that is consistent with this epistemology, building on previous work on speed, scale, stickiness, and interrelationships, but also emphasising human perceptions and rhetorical uses of the notion. Third, we propose a novel typology of the ways in which the regime shift concept is used in analysing social–environmental phenomena in geography and beyond. These uses are categorised along two axes. On the one side, we distinguish between description of past or present changes and normative prescriptions for the future. On the other side, we distinguish between whether the focus is on material shifts (social and ecological) or conceptual shifts (discourses and ideas). We illustrate the typology with reference to social–environmental changes in landscapes around the world that are dominated by plantations or the widespread naturalisation of Australian Acacia species. We conclude that the regime shift concept is a boundary object with value as both an analytical and communicative tool in addressing social–environmental challenges.

show abstract

Section: Epistemology: Systems and Metaphorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using the “regime shift” concept in addressing social–ecological change

Kull

Kueffer

Richardson

et al. 2017

Geographical Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…La résilience y apparait comme un mode de gouvernement à distance, un « régime de subjectivation » 2 , favorisant l'incorporation par les individus de techniques de soi et de manière de se penser en sujets responsables et adaptables dans un monde que l'Etat ou les autres institutions sociales stables (la classe sociale, l'identité etc.) n'ont plus le pouvoir, ou le souhait, de réguler (Evans, Reid, 2015, Biermann et al 2015. Le succès de la notion dans les discours et orientations des grandes institutions internationales indique par ailleurs, pour de nombreux auteurs, un infléchissement profond des politiques transnationales.…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

Le tournant néolibéral de la résilience ? Pratiques et formes politiques de l’opérationnalisation de la résilience à Dakar

Leclercq¹

2017

URiS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

RÉSUMÉ. Le concept de résilience et son opérationnalisation dans les politiques internationales ont été récemment critiqués par de nombreux auteurs comme outil de l'expansion d'une forme de « gouvernementalité » néolibérale. Dans les « pays du Sud » en particulier, son application dans des politiques d'adaptation aux risques se traduirait par un transfert de la responsabilité du risque, des pouvoirs publics vers les individus et « communautés », participant ainsi de l'extension d'une rationalité de marché à l'ensemble de la vie sociale. Pourtant, peu d'études s'intéressent aux effets concrets des programmes d'adaptation et de résilience sur les populations ciblées par ces programmes. A partir d'une ethnographie d'un programme d'adaptation du territoire et de résilience face au risque d'inondation mis en place par la Banque mondiale et l'Etat sénégalais dans la banlieue de Dakar, cet article entend revenir sur la production des transferts de responsabilité liés à l'opérationnalisation de la résilience. Il montre que ces transferts s'opèrent selon des modes de représentation et des pratiques ancrées dans un contexte. Au final, la résilience appliquée aux populations confrontées au risque d'inondation apparait bien comme la composante d'une forme de « gouvernementalité », mais remettant l'Etat au centre de la gestion du risque, créant un régime de pouvoir s'articulant plus que ne se confondant au régime néolibéral. ABSTRACT. The resilience concept and its operationalization within the international policies had been criticized by authors as a way to develop a neoliberal governmentality through the world. Especially in the countries of the global South, its enforcement into adaptation and risk policies would come down to a risk responsibility transfer, from the public authorities to individuals and "communities", participating thus to the spread of a market rationality within the whole social life. However, few studies are dealing with the concrete effects of adaptation and resilience programs on the targeted populations. From an ethnography of resilience and territorial adaptation to the flooding risk project set up by the World Bank and the Senegalese State in the Dakar suburbs, this article aims to analyse the responsibility transfers production linked to resilience operationalization. It shows that the configuration of power set up through this programme is more articulated to, than fully integrated to the neoliberal governmentality. MOTS-CLÉS. Gouvernementalité, néolibéralisme, risque, inondations, résilience.

show abstract

“…Resilience has also been critiqued as inherently conservative, by definition preferring the status quo in socialecological arrangements and, arguably, shifting the responsibility for coping with environmental change onto those least able to carry the burden and in so doing recreating unequal social relations (Robinson and Carson, 2015). Moreover, resilience says little about the relations of knowledge and power that inform its definition -it is "socially contingent, rarely addressing the question of 'resilience for whom'" (Brown, 2014;Biermann, 2015). Cote and Nightingale (2012), for example, draw attention to how achieving resilience for some may come at a cost for others.…”

Section: Adaptation and Resiliencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Social science and social theory provide critical tools for resilience in this regard (Biermann, 2015). The analytical framework of "path dependence" has been used to show that contemporary resilience can be significantly determined by social histories (Dagdeviren et al 2015), adding to calls for "situated" resilience research that pays more attention to embedded socio-cultural relations, and less to checklists of predetermined characteristics that are to be embedded in or enacted through institutions (Cote and Nightingale, 2012).…”

Section: Adaptation and Resiliencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, to do so requires reading a great deal of meaning into a single characteristic focused on taking account of "issues of justice and equity" in the distribution of wealth and assets, between generations and via attention to "soft" social systems (Bahadur et al 2013: 7). Recent trends in the literature reveal at least four important themes: (i) the uneven power relations and risk perception within communities (Ensor, 2014;Forsyth, 2013;Granderson, 2014;Walker et al, 2014); (ii) the scalar politics of vulnerability and resilience (Pauwelussen, 2016;Ingalls and Stedman, 2016;Yates, 2012); (iii) the inadequacy of institutional design in addressing historically and culturally embedded relations of power (Cote and Nightingale, 2012;Dagdeviren et al 2015;Sjostedt, 2015); and (iv) the significance of structure and knowledge in determining "who is getting what" from resilience (Biermann, 2015;Dagdeviren et al 2015;Fainstein, 2015;Ingalls and Stedman, 2016;MacKinnon and Derickson, 2013).…”

Section: Resilience Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Can community-based adaptation increase resilience?

Ensor

Park

Attwood

et al. 2016

Climate and Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A central claim of community-based adaptation (CBA) is that it increases resilience. Yet, the concept of resilience is treated inconsistently in CBA, obscuring discussion of the limitations and benefits of resilience thinking and undermining evaluation of resilience outcomes in target communities. This paper examines different participatory assessment activities carried out as part of CBA case studies in Timor-Leste and Solomon Islands. The activities and their outputs were assessed against ten characteristics of resilience previously identified in a systematic review. The findings offer support to the claim that CBA can build resilience in target communities, revealing the inherent strengths of CBA in relation to resilience. However, it is necessary for CBA assessments to simultaneously incorporate activities that consider cultural, political, economic and ecological factors influencing resilience within and between communities. This may demand multiple staff with different skills. The findings also highlight the importance of politics and power in shaping adaptive capacity. In particular, addressing the highly context specific nature of social, cultural and political relations demands an approach that is situated in and responsive to local realities. Overall, our case study suggests that using the ten characteristics as an analytical framework offers support to practitioners looking to develop, implement or evaluate CBA assessment activities. Yet within this, it is critical that a focus on increasing resilience through CBA does not preclude transformation in social relations. Realising the potential to support resilience and transformation requires CBA practitioners to acknowledge the multifaceted nature of resilience, whilst also paying close attention to multiple potential barriers to equitable adaptation.

show abstract

Approaching a critical turn? A content analysis of the politics of resilience in key bodies of resilience literature

Cited by 42 publications

References 65 publications

Using the “regime shift” concept in addressing social–ecological change

Using the “regime shift” concept in addressing social–ecological change

Le tournant néolibéral de la résilience ? Pratiques et formes politiques de l’opérationnalisation de la résilience à Dakar

Can community-based adaptation increase resilience?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About